Re: Documentation files in html format?

["Brennan Ashton" <comphappy@gmail.com>]

On 8/9/07, Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de> wrote:
> Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > Advantages of html:
> >   * basic formatting like lists, italics, etc
>
> Plaintext has lists too.  See for example
> <20070809113122.3aa508e4@oldman.hamilton.local>.  ;-)
>
> It's also possible to approximate bold face, italics, and underlines in
> plaintext.
>
> >   * easier to integrate into other places and retain formatting
>
> Out-of-tree places?
>
> >   * ability to link documents and to external sources easier
>
> In which way are URIs and other references in HTML easier than in plaintext?
>
> > Downsides:
> >   * can become too formatted and unclear
> >   * accessibility and translation issues?
> >   * even more style issues
>
> Indeed.
> --
> Stefan Richter
> -=====-=-=== =--- -=--=
> http://arcgraph.de/sr/
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
I am with you on this one, i am less than convinced that HTML is
better, IMHO it is a wrong direction.  Plain Text documentation is one
of the things i love about linux, it has worked for so many years why
change now. As Stefan explained there are simple ways to get around
all of the points that you gave.

-- 
Brennan Ashton